Darrell Issa: The $67 billion answer to Obama's spending cut dilemma

March 20, 2013

Updated Aug. 21, 2013 1:17 p.m.

1 of 1

In this March 4, 2013, photo, The White House is seen through a chain-link fence where the inaugural reviewing stand once stood in Washington. Automatic spending cuts that took effect last Friday are expected to touch a vast range of government services. The Obama administration is canceling tours of the White House beginning Saturday, March 9, citing staffing reductions prompted by automatic budget cuts that began to take effect last Friday. PABLO MARTINEZ MONSIVAIS, ASSOCIATED PRESS

In this March 4, 2013, photo, The White House is seen through a chain-link fence where the inaugural reviewing stand once stood in Washington. Automatic spending cuts that took effect last Friday are expected to touch a vast range of government services. The Obama administration is canceling tours of the White House beginning Saturday, March 9, citing staffing reductions prompted by automatic budget cuts that began to take effect last Friday. PABLO MARTINEZ MONSIVAIS, ASSOCIATED PRESS

A recent survey released by the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform revealed that the president's own inspectors general, the watchdogs embedded in each government agency, have 16,906 unimplemented recommendations that would result in $67 billion in savings to the American people.

So, with sequestration responsible for a mandatory 2.3 percent spending reduction in federal government spending, you would think President Obama would welcome the saving recommendations identified by the very people who work for him.

Instead, the White House's first reaction was to announce that "due to staffing reductions resulting from sequestration, we regret to inform you that White House tours will be cancelled effective Saturday, March 9, 2013, until further notice. Unfortunately, we will not be able to reschedule affected tours."

So the first place the president looked to reign in government spending was cancelling public tours instead of at the $67 billion lost to waste, fraud, abuse and inefficiency in government that his own employees have found?

At a press conference, President Obama declared that the Capitol janitors and security guards "just got a pay cut ... that's real." Only it wasn't. The superintendent of the Capitol had to notify employees in writing that "pay and benefits of EACH of our employees WILL NOT be impacted."

The education secretary warned that tens of thousands of teachers could lose their jobs but couldn't provide any facts to support his statement, ultimately admitting that he "didn't know." The Washington Post said it best when they wrote "... there is no reason to hype the statistics – or to make scary pronouncements on pink slips being issued based on misinformation ... ."

It's very clear that for the president and his allies, the politics of sequestration has taken precedence over solving the actual problem as they have embarked on a deliberate campaign to mislead the American people while coming up with almost any excuse to not do what is necessary and enact real spending cuts.

It's worth noting that an ABC News-Washington Post poll conducted recently shows overwhelming public support for cutting federal government spending. Why? Because the American people understand that Washington takes too much and we lose literally hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars to waste, fraud and abuse.

Last year, the federal government paid more than $439 million in bonuses to federal employees.

A federal agency held two conferences in Orlando, Fla. costing taxpayers more than $6 million.

The General Services Administration spends more than $24 million a year on 8,000 contracts for outdated products like typewriters and trophies.

Taxpayers are footing a $21.6 million bill to maintain more than 3,000 homes that have been abandoned in New Orleans.

How much does cancelling White House tours save? NBC News reported $74,000 a week.

Meaningful government savings do not have to come at the expense of the hardworking American families who have saved up their hard-earned dollars to come to our nation's capitol to experience a once-in-a-lifetime American experience – especially when there is already $67 billion (that's 'b' for billion) in savings just sitting on the sidelines identified by the president's own inspectors general.

At a time of year when the Capital is bustling with students from across the country making their middle-school pilgrimage to visit our democratic institutions, the White House has put up a sign telling them they can't come in.

Those 16,000-plus unimplemented recommendations should be the first place we start when looking at how to make government more efficient and cost-effective – eliminating White House tours is both vindictive and will do absolutely nothing to address Washington's spending addiction.

Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA) is the Chairman of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform and represents the 49th Congressional District of California.

WRITE A LETTER TO THE EDITOR
Letters to the Editor: E-mail to letters@ocregister.com.
Please provide your name, city and telephone number (telephone numbers will not be published).
Letters of about 200 words or videos of 30-seconds
each will be given preference. Letters will be edited for length, grammar and clarity.

User Agreement

Keep it civil and stay on topic. No profanity, vulgarity, racial
slurs or personal attacks. People who harass others or joke about
tragedies will be blocked. By posting your comment, you agree to
allow Orange County Register Communications, Inc. the right to
republish your name and comment in additional Register publications
without any notification or payment.